Excerpts: Iranian nuclear danger.Al-Qaeda's Islamic justifications.Islamic
conference speaks.17 June 2004

+++JORDAN TIMES 17 June '04: "Editorial: Dealing with the threat"
QUOTES FROM TEXT:
"The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is already on record as
unsatisfied with the degree of cooperation the Iranian authorities are
extending to it."

"the UN must also prepare itself for the apparently inescapable fact that
Iran
will be member of the nuclear bomb club."

"Countries that may become threatened by the new Iranian nuclear power
must also be provided with ironclad security protection."
============================================================
FULL TEXT:
It appears that Tehran is heading for a showdown over its nuclear programme
not only with the US but also with other Western countries notably Britain,
France and Germany. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna
is also joining the fray for openly being critical of Iran's alleged failure
to come clean on its current nuclear programmes. IAEA is already on record
as unsatisfied with the degree of cooperation the Iranian authorities are
extending to it. The suspicions over Iran's nuclear activities grew stronger
when it was found that Iran is hiding sensitive nuclear activities and for
omitting thus far to report fully on its work on sophisticated P-2
centrifuges which can enrich uranium to bomb-grade levels. IAEA inspectors
also found traces of contamination by highly enriched uranium at three sites
in Iran. The 35-member board of governors of the UN watchdog in Vienna is
expected to take appropriate decisions on these matters.
This said, the international community must deal with the fact that there
are not only immediate shortcomings in Iran but also that it is rather
likely that it will become a nuclear power sooner or later. Instead of
concentrating only on how to abort the current Iranian activities in the
nuclear field, the UN must also prepare itself for the apparently
inescapable fact that Iran will be member of the nuclear bomb club.
There are other countries that have developed or acquired nuclear arsenals,
including North Korea, Israel, Pakistan and India. This is not to mention
the scores of other countries that not only possess such weapons but also
brag about their number and devastating powers. It may not be the end of the
world if Iran also became a nuclear power, provided it becomes bound by a
set of rules and obligations to prevent the deployment of its nuclear
weapons.
Admittedly, the nuclear genie has escaped from the bottle and there is no
turning back. The international community must therefore adopt the necessary
policies and practices to bring all nuclear powers under the umbrella of an
international treaty that is binding and strict.
Iran must be required to become subject to a new international regime on
nuclear weapons. Otherwise, it should face stiff and crippling sanctions.
Countries that may become threatened by the new Iranian nuclear power must
also be provided with ironclad security protection. This could be the only
remaining sane and practical way to deal with an eventual Iranian nuclear
threat.
[IMRA: There is also the danger from nuclear electric power stations which
can have accidents causing widespread dangerous international fallout. On
that account technologically advanced countries are not building nuclear
plants. It is also unlikely that electrticity will be cheaper from nuclear
generation in Iran than from fossil fuel stations , especially since Iran
has ample oil and gas production and reserves.]

+++ARAB NEWS (Saudi) 11 June '04:"No Religion or Fatwa Can Sanction Al-Qaeda
Outrages"
Suraya Al-Shehry, Arab News -Saudi writer based in Riyadh
QUOTES FROM TEXT:
"it is high time we examined Al-Qawda's basis for justifying these blind
killings"
"The armies must be at war and the opponents must be infidels."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:
After the terrorist attacks in Alkhobar, it is high time we examined
Al-Qaeda's basis for justifying these blind killings, namely the fatwa known
as the "Tatars" by the great jurist Ibn Taymiyya. The terrorists use that
fatwa as well as the work of people like Sayyid Qutub and Abu Ala Al-Mawdudi
... to legitimize their outrages. ...
The "Tatars" fatwa emerged when the Tartar army occupied Islamic countries,
imprisoned a good number of Muslims, shackled them and used them as human
shields in their war with the Muslims. This put the Muslims in a quandary.
Should they fight the Tatars and risk killing their brethren or cease
fighting altogether? Ibn Taymiyya issued a fatwa declaring that it was
necessary to kill the Tatars and sanctioned the shedding of Muslim blood -
but on certain conditions: The armies must be at war and the opponents must
be infidels. That condition is not fulfilled if there exists an alliance,
pact or truce between the groups.
[IMRA: The writer does not note that the non-Muslims killed were not
infidels.]
The jurist Ibn Qudama said the fatwa only applies to prisoners of war and
not to someone who merely lives next to or in the same neighborhood as an
infidel. Imam Abu-Hamed Al-Ghazali said that it was forbidden to shoot
arrows at infidels while there are Muslim prisoners among them unless lives
in the Muslim army are at risk. The Hanbalis and the Hanafis allowed it if
there is the risk of harm to the Ummah.
Imam Malik categorically rejected the killing of the Tatars, declaring that
the fatwa had been issued for a specific set of circumstances and within a
specific historical context, and he fettered the fatwa with conditions which
to deviate from would mean getting into very deep waters.
Can we claim that any of these conditions apply to the events in Saudi
Arabia? Where are the two fighting armies? Were the Muslims who were killed
prisoners of the infidels or where they merely living next to them like any
other peaceful civilian? ...
It is totally unacceptable to say that since Americans and Britons occupied
Afghanistan and Iraq and killed Muslims there, they should be killed here,
even if that involves killing Muslims living among them. Our pledge of
security with them safeguards the blood and possessions of these foreigners.
... We cannot simply betray our security contract by killing these peaceful
civilians ... .
[IMRA: What if they are soldiers or directly serve soldiers?]
Once committed there is no going back: "O ye who believe! Fulfill (all)
obligations" and "So fulfill your engagements with them to the end of their
term."
The pledge of security is one of the most important contracts in Islamic
jurisprudence and we as the Ummah must respect our contracts.
What then about the writings of Sayyid Qutub, ... his book "In the Shade of
the Qur'an" (Fi Thilal Al-Qur'an) and "Landmarks on the Road" (Maalem Fil
Tareeq). The expression "governorship" that recurs in those writings is in
effect not to be found in a single verse of the Qur'an or the Hadith. In
fact, people repeat it without knowing the facts behind it and what
circumstances drove its imprisoned author to apostatize the whole of
society. "The command rests with none but Allah," he keeps telling us. While
this is true, God left us to regulate many of the matters of our lives - so
long as we do not forbid what is allowed or allow what is forbidden. It
follows that no one can go declaring the whole of society apostate just
because it has taken to codifying traffic laws, for example. How in any case
could that be when the Qur'an itself acknowledges the rule of Muslims and,
moreover, says we are bound to obey our rulers?
The terrorists hope to strangle us by targeting the ...energy sector. They
believe this will paralyze the economy, create chaos on the world market,
tip over the oil production balance and drive down the price of stocks,
[IMRA: Why should this drive down oil prices?]
which in turn will lead to financial paralysis of the government. Yet since
the Alkhobar attacks the Saudi stock exchange has actually been invigorated.
Wouldn't it have been better if the people who taught them the use of
weapons had taught them some elementary economics? They would then have
discovered that the oil supply is not easily affected because it is subject
to the world market and the decisions of OPEC, not to the wishful thinking
of Al-Qaeda.
[IMRA: If it were otherwise, it would be O.K.?]

+++ARAB NEWS (Saudi) 17 June '04:"OIC Calls fr UN Troops Deployment in
Palestine" Agencies
QUOTE FROM TEXT:
" ' I would be wrong to say we will consider reforms once the
Palestinian issue is resolved.' "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
EXCERPYS:
ISTANBUL, 17 June 2004 - Members of the Organization of Islamic Conference
(OIC) countries meeting in Turkey yesterday called on the United Nations to
send troops to the Palestinian territories, and also reaffirmed their
support for the creation of a Palestinian state.
Foreign ministers from the 57-nation OIC issued a statement inviting the UN
Security Council to "send UN peacekeeping forces to the Palestinian
territories in order to provide international protection to the Palestinian
people."
The officials ... also called for an end to the Israeli occupation of "all
Arab territories, including Jerusalem," and for Israel's siege of the
headquarters of ...Arafat to be lifted.
The OIC welcomed the scheduled transfer of power in Iraq but added the
handover had to be made in full. A statement issued after the foreign
ministers' meeting in Istanbul said: "We support the process in which the
Iraqis will assume their sovereignty. We state that this assumption of
authority must be full." ....
[IMRA: Evidently the OIC will give neither money nor presonnel to
assist.]
Representatives from 57 Muslim nations wrapped up the three-day conference
yesterday in which Iraq and the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict
dominated talks.
As with previous OIC declarations, the final statement offered full support
for the Palestinian people and for a Palestinian state. "We urge the quartet
(of the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations) to
work to stop Israeli aggression in all its forms, secure international
protection for the Palestinian people and guarantee free movement for the
people and their leadership," the statement said.
The conference statement also said the OIC would take steps to "end the
unjust isolation" of Turkish Cypriots and called on the international
community to join in this effort.
[IMRA: Evidently said nothing about Islamists in Sudan mass murdering
Blacks, or the massive terror killing in Algeria.]
... the conference elected Turkey's Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu as its new
secretary general. Founded in 1971, one of the OIC's main goals is to
support Palestinians in the Mideast conflict.
Meanwhile, Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said yesterday Muslim
countries should undertake reforms for modernization without using the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a pretext for delay.
"It is a fact that it is not possible to make progress in reforms without a
solution to the Palestinian issue," Gul told a press conference at the end
of the OIC meeting.
"But it would be wrong to say 'we will consider reforms once the Palestinian
issue is resolved'. They (Muslim countries) need to address these two
questions at the same time," he added. The minister, however, underlined
that the reforms should be carried out by the countries themselves rather
than imposed from outside.

Dr. Joseph Lerner, Co-Director IMRA